Monthly Archives: February 2018

Hatred and a Man After God’s Own Heart

Posted on by
5

How could David, a man “after God’s own heart,” hate others? How could his statements of disdain be included in the worship of God, who is love?

There are a number of songs in scripture that are called “imprecatory.” [Imprecatory Praying: The Mercy of Destruction] These Psalms are a call for God’s judgment on people. These Psalms were always a mystery to me as are three particular Psalms of David where he expresses his “hatred” for enemies.

The Depravity of Man

A difficult concept for Christians to grasp is the depravity of man. Every man (and woman) is born in sin…in fact conceived in sin according to David in Psalm 51:5. This is not difficult to see in our world. There is the sense that we live on a level playing field when it comes to depravity. We are all sinful and capable of great sin. If we truly know our hearts, we realize that God has saved us from incredible evil. We do not act upon half the wicked ideas our hearts develop.

Knowing we are broken should keep us humble and gracious to others.

However, we also have differing experiences with evil. Some evil is different. As individuals, people stand before God with greater and lesser evil. We see men tell bold-faced lies (and refuse to acknowledge it) and are baffled by it. We see men clearly seek after only their own good (with no apology) and are deeply troubled by it. There are Hitlers and Stalins and Bundys. Though every sin is an affront to God, there is a hierarchy of sin in its destructiveness. And there are those who are especially good at really bad stuff and have greater culpability as Jesus says:

And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating. But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating.

[Luke 12:47-48 (ESV)]

We are shocked and surprised by these destructive individuals, especially when these people are Christian pastors or leaders. They profess faith, preach Christian ethics, and yet lie and abuse.

It is our befuddlement that allows abusive individuals to continue. We think, “How could he ever do such a thing to his wife…or employee…or children?” We are paralyzed by the duplicity.

As noted in other blogs, humility is evidence that God is at work in the eradication of our sin (sanctification). But, there are men (and women) everywhere that are so rotted to the core, they seem to have no humility and do not respond to God’s common grace. They live to manipulate others. They live to control others to their own benefit.

Though Psalm 26 does not call for God’s judgment on evil people, as do the imprecatory Psalms, King David expresses his hatred for them. Hear King David’s words:

1 Vindicate me, O LORD,
for I have walked in my integrity,
and I have trusted in the LORD without wavering.
2 Prove me, O LORD, and try me;
test my heart and my mind.
3 For your steadfast love is before my eyes,
and I walk in your faithfulness.
4 I do not sit with men of falsehood,
nor do I consort with hypocrites.
5 I hate the assembly of evildoers,
and I will not sit with the wicked.
6 I wash my hands in innocence
and go around your altar, O LORD,
7 proclaiming thanksgiving aloud,
and telling all your wondrous deeds.
8 O LORD, I love the habitation of your house
and the place where your glory dwells.
9 Do not sweep my soul away with sinners,
nor my life with bloodthirsty men,
10 in whose hands are evil devices,
and whose right hands are full of bribes.
11 But as for me, I shall walk in my integrity;
redeem me, and be gracious to me.
12 My foot stands on level ground;
in the great assembly I will bless the LORD.

Psalm 26

“I hate the assembly of evildoers.” This was a man who knew God’s love. He was humble enough to admit his sins. He knew the depravity of all men. He loved the people for whom he was given charge to the point that he chose particular discipline from the Lord for his sin so the nation, Israel would not suffer. [1 Chronicles 21:17]

Biblical Anomaly?

We might be tempted to suggest this “hatred” was an anomaly.

Why would he openly proclaim his hatred of evildoers? Scripture is interpreted in the context of the rest of scripture and we should not place too much emphasis on an anomaly for the formation of doctrine. However, within the scriptural context there is plenty of hate.

David says in another Psalm [Psalm 31:6], “I hate those who pay regard to worthless idols, but I trust in the LORD.” Or consider Psalm 139:21-22: “Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against you? I hate them with complete hatred; I count them my enemies.”

What was David’s deal?

David does not back off as the Psalms progress. His statements are with conviction and finality. There are no apologies. It is complete (תַּכְלִית) hatred. Perfect hatred.

David’s hatred is not an anomaly.

An OT God of Wrath?

Is David’s view peculiar to Old Testament ethics where God is portrayed as a “God of wrath.”

On this view, David is simply following his God, who was wrathful in the Old Testament. Jesus then updated things – brought the love of God to earth. He got to the heart of the matter by saying hatred is as sinful as murder (Matthew 5:21-26).

But, not until then was hatred considered a breaking of the sixth commandment.

However, the Old Testament does speak to the heart. Consider Leviticus 19:17a: “You shall not hate your brother in your heart...” And God is by no means any more a God of wrath in the Old Testament than new (compare Exodus 19:3-6 and Acts 5:1-11).

David knew his scripture. This was not just an Old Testament rash statement by him.  There must be something biblical about hate in this broken world where we are normally called to love others.

Imaging God

Is it possible that in our likeness of God we are at times called to hate as He hates?

In the next Psalm, number 140, David carries on with his theme. He says,

Deliver me, O Lord, from evil men; preserve me from violent men, who plan evil things in their heart and stir up wars continually. They make their tongue sharp as a serpent’s, and under their lips is the venom of asps.

Psalm 140:1-3 (ESV)

David makes it very clear, these evil men are really bad! He heaps judgment upon these individuals who plan evil things. They not only “plan” the evil, they continually do it he says. Their tongues are evil. He says, they set traps. These are not friends who periodically say something inappropriate, maybe even mean.

Our God is most certainly a gracious and forgiving God. He is long-suffering and gentle. Yet, when one of His created beings refuses to acknowledge the works He has done to redeem a people for Himself, God condemns that person to eternal suffering.

He is against those who oppress others (Exodus 3:9, 22:21, Leviticus 19:13, Deuteronomy 24:14). His people are always called to side with Him and the oppressed.

Unlike God, we are not able to declare a person forever unredeemable. He knows the hearts of all men and has the power to regenerate them – change their very nature. Where God can and does change hearts, regenerating, and sanctifying them, we will never be able to do such wondrous things. We do not know whether a person will turn to the Lord or not.

Judgments

Therefore, are we to refuse judging other men? There truly are people who are so destructive, the only way for them to stop is for others to bring an end to their works of evil. Maybe this is the kind of hatred of which David is speaking?

You and I are sinful. We are culpable for our lies and mean tongues. We need the forgiveness of Jesus and his payment for our sin on the cross.

But, these people are so destructive to others, it is necessary to judge their evil in our earthly ways – by church and civil courts, self-defense, and personal rejection. No more coddling. No more cheap grace. We need to care for the oppressed more than for the oppressor.1

In fact, our loyalty to God and that care for the oppressed may look very much like hatred for the oppressor. [Luke 14:26] As we care for the oppressed and call for justice on the abusive and toxic individual it will look like hatred to others. But, that care and call are expressions of love for God and neighbor.

Going Forward

The words of David are difficult for me, a Christian taught for many years that hatred is always wrong. The words I have written are an expression of my belief that there is something missing in my understanding of hatred in scripture.

Maybe a better theologian than I can shed some light on this rather dark and difficult path. [recommended book]2

NOTES:

  1. Lundy Bancroft told me recently, “I’m not opposed to attempts to help abusive people change, I’m just bothered at how that goal keeps eclipsing the needs of victims/targets, and eclipsing the need to impose meaningful (read; unpleasant) consequences on the perpetrators.” ↩︎
  2. Daniel Michael Nehrbass, Praying Curses: The Theraputic and Preaching Value of the Imprecatory Psalms (Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publications, 2013). [Buy here on Amazon] ↩︎

Self-Differentiation: Standing with Wisdom

Posted on by
13

I recently heard John’s story, a long-time Christian whose leadership in his church was scuttled by the others on the leadership team. It was a difficult story to hear.

My friend, John*, is “self-differentiated.”  This was a new term to me just a few years ago. I was working on a doctorate and studying abusive leadership when I was introduced to this psychological term. I was challenged to make it a goal for my own character development.

As Herrington, Creech, and Taylor define it,

“Differentiation is the ability to remain connected in relationship to significant people in our lives and yet not have our reactions and behavior determined by them.”1

Psychologist, Edwin Friedman popularized the concept many years ago. He described individuals who might actually come across as “cruel, cold, unfeeling, uncooperative, insensitive, selfish, strong -willed, or hard-headed.”2 However, he was quick to explain:

“I do not mean an autocrat who tells others what to do or orders them around… Rather, I mean someone who has clarity about his or her own life goals, and, therefore, someone who is less likely to become lost in the anxious emotional processes swirling about.“3

Being self-differentiated means not being a people-pleaser. But, it also does not mean (in the biblical form) being arrogant or lacking empathy. It really means being above the fray…being able to determine the correct course of action based on your standards rather than by testing the anxious waters of those around you.

I would describe John as self-differentiated, and would quickly add, his fellow leaders (elders) apparently were not. John is the go-to guy when you need someone to wade into confrontational waters. He is the one asking questions. He is the one who challenges ideas. He is the one whose reactions are not determined by those who surround him.

When he was on the leadership team of the church, the decisions were always unanimous despite his questioning and challenges to ideas presented. It was evident that he did not simply hold to a position with an inability to humbly recognize other views. He asks questions. He helps others think through the issues. Then holds his position or changes according to what he believes to be true.

John described how his election to the board of the church was stopped due to allegations that he was not qualified according to 1 Timothy 3. The accuser was never made known to John and neither were specifics of those allegations.

The reason I would suggest the other elders were not self-differentiated is that their actions, each step of the way, seemed to display a “failure of nerve,” as Friedman puts it. Whether or not the accusations were founded on fact is of great concern to John. If there was some failing in his character, he would like to know. But, instead there was just silence.

The strange thing about self-differentiation is that others, who do not have it, often place their own anxiety on the self-differentiated. This drives the people-pleaser to keep confrontation at arm’s length. They think they will hurt feelings (like they would have their feelings hurt), make angry (like they would be angered), and cause an unpleasant incident.

And yet, the self-differentiated is the one who is safest to confront. Their feelings are not going to be hurt. They are not going to go into an angry tirade. They will not be unpleasant. A godly, self-differentiated individual will hear the complaint and weigh the validity of it against a biblical standard…and either confess or reject the claim.

Fear of Confrontation

I could sense a fear of confrontation in John’s story creeping into a process that required faith in God’s process – a process that involves brother-to-brother confrontation when one believes the other has sinned. Rather than bring the accuser together with accused, silence reigned. It was as if the leaders just wanted it to go away. No argument. No battle.

In the end, the church humiliated John with a public statement that he was unqualified to lead according to the 1 Timothy standards – no specifics given. When he confronted the church leadership, they made another public statement that John had not committed “sexual immorality.” Nothing else.

Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil. [1 Timothy 3:2-7 (ESV)]

Neither John nor I know what was happening behind closed doors. But, the lack of communication, which I am interpreting as fear of conflict, has deeply wounded the John. There is broken fellowship.

Herrington, Creech, and Taylor say,

“Jesus cared for the crowds, but he governed his relationship to their needs on the basis of principle, not their demands. He would serve them, but they would not determine his decisions.“4

When we allow our anxiety to rule our decision-making instead of God’s Word, it can create havoc relationally. It is ironic that when we are most often seeking to allay relational damage, those relationships suffer much greater violence in turn.

It takes trust that God will “work all things together for our good” to knowingly enter conflict. But, conflict created by the loving attempt to help someone grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ is well worth the relational struggle. The church leaders missed a golden opportunity to model godly differentiation to their congregation when they kept the accusations quiet and refused to allow John the opportunity to defend himself or grow through confrontation. In fact, his response to his accuser would have given them an excellent picture of his character.

As Friedman notes,

“Differentiation is being clear about one’s own personal values and goals. Differentiation is taking maximum responsibility for one’s own emotional being and destiny rather than blaming others or the context.”5

Friedman was not a Christian, yet had very helpful things to say that challenge those of us who seek people’s pleasure rather than the Lord’s. What are our personal, God-given values and goals? And will we stand by them?

Notes:

* John is not his real name.

1  Jim Herrington;Robert Creech;Trisha L. Taylor. The Leader’s Journey: Accepting the Call to Personal and Congregational Transformation (Jossey-Bass Leadership Network Series) (Kindle Locations 273-274). Kindle Edition.

2 Friedman, Edwin H. (2007-02-01). A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix (Kindle Locations 1679-1683). Church Publishing Inc.. Kindle Edition.

3 Ibid. (Kindle Locations 341-342).

4 Herrington. (Kindle Locations 322-323).

5 Friedman. (Kindle Locations 3364-3374).

Why Does He Do That: A Day With Lundy Bancroft

Posted on by
3

I spent a day hearing Lundy Bancroft share his 30 years of research. Of course it could have been a month! I have written of Bancroft’s defining of “repentance” before.  As one seminar participant said, “I felt like I was in the presence of greatness!” This awe is due to the fact that Bancroft has spent 30 years standing for those oppressed by abusers. The number of women and men, Christian and non-Christian, who Bancroft has helped over the years is staggering. Continue reading →